A Debate About Values

Many years ago, Ventura County elected officials and residents looked hard at how we wanted development to occur. This vision called for urban uses within cities, agricultural preservation and distinct non-urban areas (greenbelts) between cities.

Ventura County basically maintains that ideal. Our quality of life is balanced; we rank 12th statewide in both population and agricultural production, yet we are conducting countywide town hall forums to consider how can we remain agriculturally strong, control urban sprawl, promote economic vitality within the urban boundaries and provide quality services for all citizens.

One of our greatest threats to maintaining this balance, especially in the agriculturally rich Santa Clara River Valley, comes from outside by way of the proposed Newhall Ranch development. Crammed against the county line, it would create a community of 70,000 people, about 24,000 residential units and 5 million square feet of commercial / industrial space.

In addition, Newhall owns 16,000 acres in Ventura County, land on which all state land conservation contracts have been canceled. It is clear that the Newhall Ranch specific plan is the first phase of a larger development vision that may include Ventura County.

Common sense dictates the proposed project would have tremendous impacts on our air and water quality, traffic, wildlife, flood control channels, agricultural lands and the health of one of the last wild rivers in Southern California, the Santa Clara. However, Los Angeles County planning staff and Newhall officials ignore common sense by maintaining that impacts will be minimal or will actually stop at the county line. The Los Angeles County planning staff virtually ignored 200 pages of technical comments made by Ventura County on the project’s environmental impact report. They discounted their own EIR recommendations on how to limit impacts on Ventura County.

On Dec. 17, 1997, the L.A. County Regional Planning Commission showed its lack of consideration by refusing to hear public testimony from me and Supervisor John Flynn before approving the Newhall Ranch vesting tentative parcel map and conditional-use permit. We have appealed their actions. Fillmore and Santa Paula signed a joint resolution with us objecting to the project, and Santa Clarita (in Los Angeles County) also appealed. Opposition continues to grow.

My fellow board members and I are determined that our concerns will be addressed, by building allies, establishing a public record of the issues and demanding that our voices be heard. Ventura County residents often hold up Los Angeles County as an example of what they don’t want to become. I can’t imagine that Santa Clarita Valley citizens would object to being more like Ventura County in look and feel. Perhaps now is the time, and Newhall Ranch is the project on which we raise our united voices and take a stand.